Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Launcher
By
Hammad-ur-Rehman ME-131013
Umer Danish Bashir ME-131046
Abdullah Soleh ME-131023
Charles Kumar ME-131107
Noman Iqbal ME-131123
Bachelor of Engineering
in
1
Abstract
An unmanned air vehicle launcher is required for defence and surveillance requirements.
A basic hindrance in the use of U.A.V. is the requirement of large runway for takeoff,
which is difficult to arrange. Therefore we are building a U.A.V. catapult mechanism to
aid in this situation. The catapult is a lightweight and rigid structure that is able to
accommodate different sizes of U.A.Vs for the launch. The base of the catapult is a truss
structure that is very light and strong. Guidance rail is attached on top of the structure for
the trolley travel. This report evaluates the multiple design solutions of a lightweight,
portable and rigid structure of UAV launcher that can be designed and fabricated as per the
specific requirements.
2
Table of Contents
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Bunge/Spring........................................................................................................ 7
3
3.1 Design Requirements: ........................................................................................ 13
References ........................................................................................................................ 41
4
List of Tables
5
List of Figures
Figure 2.2: UAV Launcher mounted on single axes trailer [4] ....................................................... 10
Figure 3.4.1.4: Simulink Model replicating the behavior of tank discharge process ................. 22
Figure 3.4.1.6.2: Comparison of pressure profile between Analytical & SimScape ................... 26
Figure 3.4.1.7.2: Velocity Profile comparison between Analytical and SimScape Combine ....... 30
6
Chapter 1: Introduction
An unmanned air vehicle launcher is a mechanism which allows the unmanned air vehicle
to be launched from almost everywhere (like rough terrains, urban areas etc.) in a relatively
short distance. It also eliminate the need of runway. There are few types of unmanned air
Hydraulic, electromagnetic etc.). Depending on the design, they can be based on multiple
platforms including ships, land vehicles, and even other aircraft [1].
1.2 Bunge/Spring
Bungee/Spring Bungee or spring systems store the required energy for launch by physical
lightweight, and relatively simple to implement. Using AVAs [2] existing launcher as an
example of the simplicity, this system does not require a shuttle or retainer.
1.3 Pneumatic
Pneumatic systems are found to be the most common. They utilize compressed air to
7
1.4 Hydraulic
Hydraulic launchers are less common than pneumatic, and they have higher pressure
requirements for the hydraulic uid than their pneumatic counterparts. These system
requires high pressure to operate therefore safety precautions must be applied while dealing
with them.
1.5 Electromagnetic
Electromagnetic systems are essentially modied rail guns using uctuating magnetic
elds to propel a ferrous shuttle down the launch rail. These systems are highly complex
able to launch a U.A.V at take-off speed within a short track at a small tilt angle.
1.7 Objective
To build an unmanned air vehicle launcher that can safely launch an unmanned air vehicle
with in a short distance, while providing a launch velocity appreciably above the stall
The aim of this project is to design and fabricate a light weight, rigid and portable structure
8
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Robonic family and is optimised to meet the growing market demand for tactically
responsive launch systems for small UAVs and light target drones. It is capable of
launching 40Kg unmanned air vehicle at a speed of 15m/s. This is achieved using a
along the 3.5m launch rail. However, it is very disadvantageous for us because our
launchers. The launcher shown in (figure: ` 2.2) is MDS Hercules Pneumatic Launcher,
capable of launching a 250Kg unmanned air vehicle at a speed of 55m/s. This is achieved
using a low pressure pneumatic system that operates at up to 10 bar, providing a smooth
acceleration profile along the 16m folding launch rail. The total weight of the launcher is
6000kg.However, the disadvantage in our case include: Huge weight, High purchasing
9
Figure 2.2-UAV Launcher mounted on single axes trailer [4]
launcher. The launcher is a free standing unit based on a 6.22 meter launch rail with a 15
launch angle when deployed. The air vehicle is mounted on a trolley that moves freely
along the rail. The trolley is driven through four elastic power bands, tensioned with a rail-
mounted electric winch. It has the capability to withstand with a maximum payload of
20Kg with maximum launch velocity of 20m/s. However, this launcher is disadvantageous
10
2.3 TASUMA Aerospace Composite Engineering:
The unmanned air vehicle launcher A3 Observer shown in (figure: 2.3) is manufactured
electro-hydraulic ram with a maximum launch weight of 50kg. The rail length is 7.5m and
the maximum launch speed is 35m/s. However, it is disadvantageous for because it is not
weight UAVs launching. Very high performances, autonomous driving force, maximum
trailer), and fully ensured repeatability in all environments and operational scenarios. The
launcher is actuated by medium pressure pneumatic and has the ability to launch a
maximum pay load of 150Kg with a maximum launch velocity 38m/s. However, the design
doesnt meet out desired specifications the desired pay load is 200Kg with a maximum
11
Figure 2.4-ATLAS ME-01 UAV Launcher [7]
In conclusion, after having a thorough market survey, it is found that, there is a general
lack of information available for UAV launching systems. This is primarily attributed to a
low degree of innovation in the designs. As a result of this, there is not a high degree of
competition in the market. The limited cases for which comprehensive information is
available are for the few companies producing launchers compatible with multiple UAV
platforms. Their marketing strategies lead to the second conclusion that, the market is not
advertised system are its ease of setup and portability. This is likely because these two
variables greatly affect the versatility and ease of use of the UAV. However, parameters
critical to swarming scenarios, like UAV loading and system reset times, are rarely
mentioned. However, they all failed to satisfy our design criteria, that it should be portable,
light weight, rigid structure and should be capable to launch a maximum load of 200Kg
12
Due to the limitations involved in the UAV launchers discussed under the literature
review section there is a need for making a UAV launcher from scratch that would
It is to be used for the surveillance of the city. The required specifications for the design
are,
The structure should be rigid, in order to bear all the reaction forces during service.
The launch velocity should be greater than / equal to 20% more than given stall
speed.
driven by using elastic energy, accumulated in rubber cords, into kinetic energy.
13
The advantages using bungee launcher are:
Light weight.
Free energy.
Portable.
In this design one end of bungee is attached with the rail while the other end is attached
with trolley. The trolley is then forced back at the starting point of rail in order to store
potential energy in bungee. As the trolley release the stored potential energy is then
converted into kinetic energy which produce the lift for the mounted UAV on trolley.
The main advantages for using UAV car top launch are:
14
Simple in design.
Light weight.
Portable.
As the car moves forward the velocity is increased. When the speed of the car reached at
the launch speed, the UAV is then released and its start flying up in the air.
panel. The low pressure pneumatic energy conversion is used to launch the UAVs.
15
High launch velocities.
In this design the pay load is launched by mean of pressure. A long cylinder enclosed by
piston is mounted with the rail. A hard metal wire along with pulleys is joining the trolley
with the piston to produce forward and backward motion. As the pressure applies to the
3.3.1 Evaluation
The designs that were illustrated and discussed earlier for launching mechanism are
evaluated below.
Advantages: Light weight, free energy, portable, maintenance cost is low, rigid structure.
16
Design 2: UAV car top launch
Advantages: Light weight, simple design, portable, purchasing cost is very low.
Disadvantages: Road is required to drive car, Not able to launch heavy payloads (> 20 Kg).
Based on the evaluation above, the most suitable design based on our requirements is
Design Pneumatic Launch. The 3D cad model for the mechanism is created in Solid
17
Pulley for steel cable
Launch Rail, 55 ft
Aircraft, 400Wheeled
lb
piston
Compressor 100 psi, 5
cfm
Pneumatic Cylinder,
200 mm bore, 50 ft
Accumulator 220
stroke of the piston
End position
cu.ft.
Isometric View
18
Front View
Side View
19
System Isometric view
20
Trolley Isometric View
We have modeled our complete U.A.V Launcher in SIMSCAPE/MATLAB for the initial
sizing and optimization of operational parameters. We at first did some calculations based
on research papers to validate our simulation. Along with the construction of prototype for
Simulink is a tool linked with MATLAB, which provides a wired blocks based modeling
technique. This approach provides strong visual confirmation the user about the models
correctness and getting sense out of it. Within Simulink there are different modules that
21
range from computational mathematical modeling to physical modeling block systems.
with the ability to connect them in a real world kind of manner. This real world depiction
of mathematical model provides immense help in modeling complex real world systems
with great ease. In this way modeling large systems in SIMSCAPE allows users to model
their non-linearity as well. But to get confidence over the model, the model needs to be
validated, with physical model and/or mathematical models that themselves have been
We researched and short listed two research papers from resources like American Society
for Engineering Education, 2007 [11] and INTECH [12]. These papers model pressure
These research papers have derivation of mathematical model that are being validated by
[11] In this paper mathematical model for the differential state changes of ideal gas upon
discharge and charging process of accumulator have been derived. Ideal gas assumption
22
was carried out along with isentropic flow through the nozzle. Applying the mass
conservation principles they have defined a differential, density change expression that is
further integrated to find final density and other state parameters of ideal gas.
1 (+1 )
( ) 2 1 2 2(1 )
= [1 + ]
2
= 1
1
1 2
2
= {( ) 1}
1
This mathematical model has been solved in Matlab with ODE45 suite and compared with
the results of equivalent Simulink SIMSCAPE model shown in (figure: 3.4.1.4) which
23
Figure 3.4.1.4-Simulink model replicating the behavior of tank discharge process.
A Matlab scrip has been written to evaluate the behavior of both the tests, from analytical
model and from the SIMSCAPE model. Results are displayed in the (figure: 3.4.1.5) which
show the relative error of only 2-4 percent, and that verifies the SIMSCAPE model for tank
discharge.
These two models actually caters different type of orifice approximations. The SIMSCAPE
model uses flow discharge coefficient to model the flow in and out of the tank while the
analytical model uses the nozzle flow which is controlled by the polytrophic coefficient for
non-linearity. This poses a mismatch in the numerical accuracy for both models but the
24
overall trend is same in both of them, at different values of Cd and n for respective models,
[12] This research studies the behaviour of an ideal pneumatic actuator, with ideal gas
properties and .He worked out a mathematical model for differential pressure at the piston,
.
= . .
, is ,
25
We neglect friction effects in this models as per, assumptions taken
An equivalent model on SIMSCAPE has been constructed as in (figure 3.4.1.6) All the
parameters in both the models are kept equal and same. There have been a very good
velocity profile of the simulink model has been observed along with slight higher pressure,
an explanation for this effect is considered to be the temperature gradient effect, which has
been modeled in SIMSCAPE but in the analytical model has been assumed to be negligible.
26
Figure 3.4.1.6.2-Comparision of pressure profile between analystical and SIMSCAPE
models for pneumatic actuator.
Figure 3.4.1.6.3-This graph compares velocity of piston in pneumatic actuator as
predicted by the analytical and SIMSCAPE models
27
3.4.1.7 Coupling the Two Systems
Ok for coupling the two systems we know that for actuator system only controllable
parameter by the tank model is mass flow rate. And also this mass flow rate from the tank
side model is affected by the pressure on the actuator, instantaneously. Modified equations
are:
1 (+1 )
2(1 )
( ) 2 1 2
= [1 + ]
2
= 1
1
1 2
2
= {( ) 1}
1
28
=
.
= . .
(m g Cos 12 X 2 S CL sea )]
An equivalent SIMSCAPE model has been constructed for this study. All the parameters
in both the models, analytical and SIMSCAPE one, are kept same.
In this model we combined the two simpler analytical models above to form a complete
pneumatic actuator system. For the coupling effect we introduced the changing mass flow
rate out of the tank discharge model into the piston cylinder model and fed its pressure
differential to the tank model to calculate respective Mach no. this in turn modifies the
velocity of piston and assembly which feeds back the effects of mass and friction back on
the model.
29
Figure 3.4.1.7.1-Comparison between pressure at piston analytical and SIMSCAPE
results of combined model.
30
Figure 3.4.1.7.2-Comparison between velocity profile of analytical and SIMSCAPE
results of combined model.
31
3.4.2 Prototype Manufacturing
3.4.2.1 Introduction
A prototype testing rig has been developed to validate the analytical and SIMSCAPE
simulation results, and to be able to use SIMSCAPE model for the complete U.A.V.
catapult mechanism sizing and run time calculations. Idea is to run the piston cylinder
device with compressor and pressurized tank similar to the analytical and SIMSCAPE
constructed models and compare the results as in post processing. The study is intended to
validate the SIMSCAPE model within acceptable error tolerance. This study will led the
pathway for the more complex and complete computer aided SIMSCAPE model simulation
3.4.2.2 Methodology
A prototype of piston cylinder device has been constructed with PVC cylinder and Teflon
piston. Choice of material is based on the need of fine surface requirement in small time
and budget. Teflon piston is provided with slots for O-rings that should serve the purpose
of air tight mechanism and lubrication of the whole cylinder from inside. 5mm thickness
To make our prototype we use a PVC pipe of length 1.5 m diameter of 3 inch and 2.8 inch
inner diameter which can bare a pressure up to 35 psi. For piston we use Teflon with dia.
2.75 inch and length of 1.5 inch. On one end we use a cap and on the other hand we used
a threaded cap, on threaded cap we made a inlet for compressed air and also attached our
32
pressure sensor spark fun 14 bar. For compressed air we used a medium range
In this test we want to know at what pressure or force our piston start moving or counter
friction so for that we used a portable car tire pump to provide a compress air for our
cylinder, as you can see in Graph 1. Initially pressure increases inside cylinder and at
pressure of 1130 mBar. Piston Friction force resisting to move and after some time pressure
reaches to 1150 mBar it is the point where friction force is less than the force provided by
Pressure VS Time
1160
1140
1120
Pressre mBar
1100
1080
1060
1040
1020
1000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time Step 5000 mSec
Graph 1.
33
For this test we used a Car tire air compressor, as you can see in (figure 3.4.2.4.2). Initially
there is reading of 1000 mbar and after some time pressure inside start increasing and at
1300 mbar our Piston start moving and our pressure inside start decreasing to 1050 mbar
and cause to stop piston again, because of increase in inner volume but as compress air
provide by a double stage compressor to increase pressure inside, air pressure rise again
and know our piston start moving again on a pressure of 1200 mBar and same phenomena
increasing of volume and decreasing of pressure goes on but at the end you can see pressure
rises 1100 mbar to 1300 mbar because of max inner volume and at that point our cylinder
Pressure VS Time
1400
1200
1000
Pressure mBar
800
600
400
200
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time Step 1000 sec
Graph 2.
34
In (figure 3.4.2.4.3). as you can see initial force required by the piston to overcome its
friction between piston O-ring and cylinder wall which is 150N, at that force our piston
start moving and friction force decreasing to approx. 20 N and after that it start increasing
again up to 75N and that increase and decrease of friction force goes on but at the end it
again goes to a force of 150N. This all because of car pump we are using which has no tank
Force of Friction
180
160
140
120
100
Force in N
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-20
-40
Time Step 1000 mSec
Graph 3.
35
3.4.2.5 High Pressure Test (Test 03)
For this test we used a medium range commercial Compressor and cylinder to maintain
flow rate and to provide compress air continuously to minimize the effect of increase in
volume which may cause decrease in pressure of cylinder which you can see in (figure:
3.4.2.5.1) . Here as we open valve of compress air for our piston cylinder piston, Our Piston
start moving smoothly but at a low velocity because of low pressure during this it achieve
max pressure of 2000 mBar while it start moving approximately at 1100 mBar but there is
2000
Pressure in mBar
1500
1000
500
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time Step 50 mSec
Graph 4.
36
This test is then compared with the results from SIMSCAPE model, and the results are
presented in the Figure. , there it shows the remarkable similarity between the results. As
in the prototype model valve is opened like a ramp applied, in a short time period which is
also included in the SIMSCAPE model for more realistic results, also frictional damping
is added in the SIMSCAPE model to make it more prone to the prototype model and the
prototype vs simulink
2500 90
80
2000 70
60
piston pressure (mBar)
1500 50
matlab_simulink
40
prototype_data
analytical_results
1000 30
error
20
500 10
0 -10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
time_step 50 mili Sec
37
3.4.2.6 System Parameter Characterization
Now we use our SIMSCAPE model to find out the actual sizing parameters for our U.A.V
catapult mechanism. We have written a MATLAB script that runs a Monte Carlo based
simulation which tends to find optimum system parameters. Monte Carlo simulation has
been constructed on the basis of cost function that indicates the best performance
We are in our initial phase of sizing our system to be operated with pneumatically powered
actuator.
For our prototype model we are targeting a light weight U.A.V class with weight of about
15-25 Kg. and end velocity of 13-23 m/s. we are running through series of Monte Carlo
After first few Monte Carlo tests we have found design parameters, shown in (Table:
3.4.2.6), Velocity graph, shown in (figure: 3.4.2.6.1), Piston Pressure graph, shown in
38
Figure 3.4.2.6.1- U.A.V. Launcher Velocity at the end
39
Figure 3.4.2.6.3- Pressure in Accumulator
40
References
41
Appendix A: Basic Design Calculations
In this section, we will explore the possibility of accelerating a 200 kg aircraft on a catapult
For launching an aircraft weighing nearly 200 kg, it is not possible to use spring-loaded or
bungee type of catapults. The only option is to use either steam, hydraulic or pneumatic
power. Steam is an efficient catapult power source (used universally on all aircraft carrier
ships), but is problematic in the sense that heat signature of the steam source (boiler) is
easily detectable from the air/satellite. Hydraulic power comes at the price of maintaining
leak free piston movement and slow piston speeds. This leaves us with the option of the
The nearly constant force required to catapult an aircraft from rest to the launch speed
depends on the length of the ramp as well as the angle of the ramp with the ground. Using
a simpler analysis, we can argue that the velocity imparted at take-off is directly
2
= 2
Where n is the efficiency of acceleration a and Sramp is ramp length. Efficiency n takes care
of drag and ramp angle effects. For take-off velocity of 50 m/s, acceleration with ramp
42
Figure 1 Variation of Required Acceleration with Ramp Length for Exit Velocity of 50 m/s.
Therefore, to keep the structural design manageable, we choose a ramp length of 15 m (50
ft), which requires an acceleration of 10 g with n=0.8. We will use a moderate ramp angle
of 10.
Assuming that the piston and counter weight add another 20 kg weight, then the total
1 2
1
= = 200 502 = 250
2 2
This is the required energy to be imparted to the aircraft for attaining the specified speed
at the end of the launch rail. This energy should be equal to the work done by the force Fcat
For a pneumatic cylinder with piston diameter (bore) of dp, the pressure required is
43
=
2
4
Variation of required constant pressure in the pneumatic cylinder with bore is shown in
Figure 2 Variation of Cylinder Pressure with Bore Diameter for Required Force
We will use a bore diameter of 200 mm for a cylinder pressure of 77.5 psi (5.25 bar). Total
displacement of the cylinder will be = 4 2 = 0.5 3 = 18 3 . This stroke
2
time can be approximated as = = 0.7 . Therefore, the compressor should be
able to give a flow rate of = = 0.73 1 = 1050. Obviously, this is too much
introduce an accumulator (air storage tank) to be able to handle the sudden demand in
44
To size the accumulator, we need to specify the maximum and minimum pressures. Let us
allow a variation of 10 psi pressure, i.e. Pmax=75 psi and Pmin= 85 psi, with a mean operating
pressure of P0=80 psi. Therefore, the volume acc of the accumulator can be found from
+ 0.714 0.5
= ( ) = 0.714 = 85 0.714
= 5.353 =
( ) 1 ( )
75
1
5350 = 200 3
Therefore, the solution is to have a huge accumulator (which can be manufactured easily)
and connect it to a low cost pressure source. Such a low cost compressor could be, for
example the Husky 20 gallon electric-powered portable or the Ningbo 200 liter gas-
powered compressors.
For an air delivery rate of about 5 cfm, these compressor can fill the accumulator in
220
= = = 45
5
parallel, depressurized to 85 psi. Also oxygen cylinders for welding come in 220 cu ft
capacity.
To summarize, the pneumatic rail launcher will have the specifications shown in Table 1.
45
Table 1 Parameters of Pneumatic Rail Launcher
mass
46
Appendix B: Detailed Design Calculations
TANK SIDE
1 (0)
1 ( ) =
2 ()
1 (0)
1 1 (0) 1 ()1 1
=
1 (0)
1 1 (0) 1
=
1 ()1 (1)
1 (0)
ALSO:
1 ()
1 ( ) =
1
1 1
= (2)
1
47
FOR CYLINDER:
2 = = 2
4
Dead Volume:
2 (0) = 2 2
2 (0) = = 1
2 (0) = 1 or
sin
2 (0) = 4.5 5.5 @ = 200 = 75
( 2 )
4
2 (0) = 2 0
At t > 0:
2 ( ) = 2 ( ) 2 ()
2 2 2
= [2 () + 2 ( ) ] (3)
Also:
48
2 ()
2 =
2 ()
2 2
2 [2 () ( )] [ 2 ( ) ( )]
= (4)
2 2 ()
2
= 2 (5)
Now Simplifying:
mU.A.V X = P2 (t) A2
Psea A2 [m g Sin + 12 X 2 S CD sea
+ (m g Cos 12 X 2 S CL sea )] (6)
TEMPERATURE GRADIANT:
Two systems are interlinked therefor the temperature in one system affects the
1 1 1
= [1 1 () ] 1 1 () (4)
49
PISTON SIDE:
1
2 () 2 ()
= [ ]
1 () 1 ()
2 ( ) 1
2 () 1 ( ) 2
= 2
1 () 1 ()
2 1
2 () 2 1 ()
2 ()
= ( 1) [ ] = 2
1 () 1 ()
2 1
= 1 1 ( ) [2 ( )
2 1
2 2 () 2 1 () 2 ()
1 ( ) ( 1) { } ] (5)
1 () 1 2
2 +1
2 ( ) 2 ( )
= 2 1 ( )1 () ( ) [{ } { } ] (6)
1 1 ( ) 1 ( )
= (7)
50
So Equation (7) nonlinear differential equation needs to be solved.
Let, = 50 = and = 0
(8)
2 2 = ( + ) + 12 2 [ ] +
2 2 = ( + ) + 1 2 [ ]
(8)
2
It is obvious that desired Pressure in piston at stroke end should be proportional to and
to mass of (U.A.V + Launcher system) as well as drag proportional to the square of end
1
2 =
[ ( + )
2
+ 12 2 [ ]] (8 )
1
= [2 () 2 2 ( + )
12 2 {0 + ( )}] (7 )
1
(0) = [ ( + )]
At t=0
51
Dilation of Piston Cylinder Volume
2
= 2 (9)
2
2
= 0 = 2
2
2
2 2 = 0
=
2 2 (10)
52